Wikipedia

User talk:HJ Mitchell/Archive 115

< User talk:HJ Mitchell
Latest comment: 6 years ago by HJ Mitchell in topic Happy first edit day!
Archive 110 ← Archive 113 Archive 114 Archive 115 Archive 116 Archive 117 → Archive 120

Advice please

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Just sounding you out for some seasoned advice. See last two talk page sections of Audie Murphy and recent edit reverts, a situation that extends to Military career of Audie Murphy. The re-writing of a footnote is, to me, a breaking point of some kind. So, YahwehSaves is indef'd for the Audie Murphy stuff, and you indef'd as semi-protection, which I appreciate. But Audie Murphy is a magnet for certain types of editing. My question: what does it take to get indef Full Protection? Because this looks to go on forever. — Maile (talk) 01:23, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Maile. I'll try to keep a closer eye on the article (and I've added the military career article to my watchlist), but I'm afraid the occasional unhelpful edit is just part of Wikipedia. Anyone who has worked on any prominent article has to put up with this sort of thing. I'm afraid permanent full protection is never going to happen. We just don't permanently fully protect articles. There is not a single article on the site that is permanently fully protected (I checked; there are a couple of hundred redirects in the mainspace, a handful of disambiguations, and a few other things that are permanently fully protected, but not a single encyclopaedia entry). Keeping articles open to editing is fundamental to what Wikipedia is about, so permanently locking articles so that only admins can edit them is simply not the done thing. So much so that I don't think you'd find an admin on the site who would knowingly do it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Help request

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi dear admin. Following your previous helps and considerations to this user, I have just found out that I forgot to mention you some personal sub-pages of my own user-page which project my most personal information (this -political views & this -personal info). Finding those pages, I'd like you to help me again please to hide and protect my own personal interests, following some threatening messages I've received just recently. Thank you so much. The Stray Dog Talk Page 19:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@TheStrayDog: I've got rid of both of those. One I deleted, one I suppressed. Hope that helps. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:58, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi again! I really don't know how to thank you. You are always helpful here. Thank you for everything. The Stray Dog Talk Page 19:53, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Some IP tracks me

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

When I was blocked I noticed that there were some IPs that tracked my edits and went to wikis in other languages, such as Malay and Japanese, and now these IPs seem like they want to keep track of and make edit war.--O1lI0 (talk) 09:59, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

FAC reviewing barnstar

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  The Reviewer Barnstar
FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the seven FAC reviews you did during December. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:26, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXLI, January 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: December 2017

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 


Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Equestrian statue of Ferdinand Foch, London

Latest comment: 6 years ago24 comments5 people in discussion

Hi HJ Mitchell. Given your specialism in war memorials, would you be interested in creating an article on this statue of a French field marshal in London, which was promoted to a grade II* listing in 2016? There's absolutely no hurry to do this. Ham II (talk) 10:01, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Harry - if you pushed for time, I'd be pleased to pick this up. Pevsner's got a snippet, there are a few images, and the listing should give us the rest. Just let me know. KJP1 (talk) 10:19, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
@Ham II and KJP1: (edit conflict) Is that the one outside Victoria station? I'm astonished that doesn't have an article already. I'll add it to my list, but I'm trying to finish Lutyens' memorials before I go off on any tangents with the hope of getting the cenotaph to FA status by November (and potentially TFA on Armistice Day or Remembrance Sunday). Kevin: if you want it, feel free. I might add anything I find in the generic books on war memorials later. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:22, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
@Ham II: The very same. Positioned there at the sculptor's insistence, so that it could be seen by French soldiers arriving at/departing from la gare, so the listing tells me. I'll knock something up and you can add. Ham - do you want the title as per this heading or, Equestrian statue of Ferdinand Foch, '''Lower Grosvenor Gardens''', London? And is there an infobox template you'd prefer? KJP1 (talk) 10:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
I'd go with either Ham's suggestion or Equestrian statue of Ferdinand Foch, Lower Grosvenor Gardens and redirect the other (and any other plausible search terms, like Equestrian statue of Ferdinand Foch, Victoria). For an infobox, you could copy the template from another equestrian statue. I would obviously recommend Equestrian statue of Edward Horner, but there's Haig or Wellington or any number of other equestrian statues in central London. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:36, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) I would think it would be impossible to write anything longer than a sub-stub on this, since it's just a replica of another statue at Cassel which would presumably be the main place to write about it. I'm unaware of any book that covers it in any more detail than the fact that it exists, and even the IWM's listing gives little more than the fact that it exists. (Its entry on the Register is deceptively long; most of that text is a biography of Foch.) Meanwhile, even on fr-wiki the biography of the sculptor is so minimal there's nothing that could be taken from there either to serve as a starting point or to pad-out an article. For a topic like this it would probably make much more sense to create a List of memorials to French soldiers in the United Kingdom or similar in which the necessarily-brief entries won't look out of place, rather than create a bunch of The Crown, Cowley–style microstubs which will serve little useful purpose and be perennial deletion candidates. ‑ Iridescent 10:37, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Take the point, but I would hope we can do a little better than The Crown at Cowley! A sub-stub indeed. I'll give it a try, using Ham's suggested title and we'll see how it turns out. The Horner statute is indeed astonishing - I don't think I've seen anything quite like it in any church I've visited. I should very much like to see it "in the flesh" someday. KJP1 (talk) 10:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
(ec w/ Ham's comment below) I think there's enough for a respectable article. There probably is on The Crown if it's been there since the 16th century (imagine the history it would see in 500 years!) but it would involve a lot of research. I notice the plinth of the London statue is different to the one in France, so that's something to write; a bit of background on the sculptor and Foch; the reason it was put where it was; a bit of history on the area and Bob's your uncle, you've got a few hundred words. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:53, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
@KJP1: (edit conflict) Thank you so much for offering to take this up. I'd prefer the title as per the heading – just enough disambiguation to tell the London cast apart from the one in Cassel. My preference would be for {{Infobox artwork/wikidata}}, as seen at Statue of William Shakespeare, Leicester Square, but I'm not fussy. If you're interested in creating more articles on public art in London, please do consider joining the dedicated task force; there are still four grade I-listed works and seven grade II*-listed works without articles. HJ Mitchell, I completely understand that the Cenotaph is top priority! Ham II (talk) 10:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
And there's me thinking that every inch of London zone 1 had an article! ;) @Theramin: you might be interested in this conversation. By the way, there's no need for formality on this page; please do call me Harry. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:53, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Cheers Harry! Theare's actually a fair few public sculptures in Zone 1 still without articles if you count the grade II and unlisted ones as well. Ham II (talk) 11:06, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Slightly puzzlingly, the IWM streetview, which Iridescent gives above, appears to place it in the gardens of Buckingham Palace!? KJP1 (talk) 11:01, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Probably just a coordinates error. The rest of the information seems to tally with what we know. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:04, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Ham II Ham - do you know where I can get the latitude and longitude coordinates? KJP1 (talk) 11:12, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@KJP1: The Wikidata item has them. Ham II (talk) 11:15, 6 January 2018 (UTC) Many thanks. KJP1 (talk) 11:16, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, I hope it's a little better than The Crown. All additions/amendments/corrections gratefully received. KJP1 (talk) 13:52, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
That's a low bar pun not intended! Excellent work. There might not be an FA to be had there, but it's still a valuable contribution. I'm sure plenty of people will have walked past it and looked for more information on it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:09, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Are we sure those dimensions are right? Wouldn't 1.26 in make him about the size of Tom Thumb? KJP1 (talk) 14:14, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Ah, I see you have to tell the infobox which unit of measurement you want to use in a separate parameter. Btw, Ward-Jackson's Public Sculpture of Historic Westminster has a few more details about the inception. Do you want me to email you the relevant pages? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:22, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Many thanks. And yes, do mail them over and I'll include. I didn't mention, apropos nothing at all, my brother got me Hussey's Lutyens for Christmas. £30 in the Oxfam online shop but absolutely mint condition, including the immaculate dust jacket. His page cries out to be done over! KJP1 (talk) 14:26, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
On their way! £30 well spent if you ask me. It weighs a ton though! Yes, Lutyens deserves a featured article. If you fancy a collaboration, I'd be up for it once I've finished with his war memorials. I thought I might write an overview like Edwin Lutyens and war memorials and work my way upstream anyway. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
A Lutyens collaboration! Now that, I would thoroughly enjoy. Absolutely no hurry. I'll just keep adding to the sources and whenever you're ready, just say the word. Quite understand that the memorials come first. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 15:06, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Glad to see that the photo I took of the Foch statue now has an article! (I can take more if needed.) The shell houses in the gardens are a nice touch. I found and cropped a geograph image here. Might be of use, though a bit tangential to the statue itself (probably better in the article on the gardens). Glad to see the war memorial work is going well. Difficult to keep up at times. I noticed Civil Service Rifles War Memorial and Royal Naval Division War Memorial and the start of work on Tower Hill Memorial. Any more currently being worked on? Carcharoth (talk) 13:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Always nice when someone finds a use for one of your photos. I'm sure I've got photos of that somewhere (I pass it a few times a year, usually en route to see my goddaughter in Sussex after visiting friends in London—on that note, we should have a pint or something next time I'm up). Civil Service Rifles is at FAC and the RND is at ACR, Lancashire Fusiliers War Memorial was promoted right at the end of last year, Tower Hill I might make some progress on this weekend. I need to incorporate your suggestions about the Horners' connection to the church into Equestrian statue of Edward Horner and then I'll take that to FAC when I have a gap. That leaves Leicester, Southampton, and Whitehall of the Lutyens memorials still to be worked on (and Southampton is already a GA; a few tweaks and it should be FA quality). So I'm making progress, but it's slightly erratic! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Mark Pellegrino

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I saw that you applied protection on this article after I noted it on WP:RPP. However, I must say that I am surprised at the length of the applied protection. Yeah, the article has had persistent on-again, off-again vandalism for years, and has been on and off protection, so maybe it is warranted, but I'm curious at to whether pending changes would be more appropriate. It is very much a low-traffic article, other than the vandalism. Anyway, whatever you decide, I'm sure is for the best. I just thought I'd mention it. Orycteropus Hyacintho (talk) 10:28, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

@Orycteropus Hyacintho: I looked at the history and the protection log. It had previously been protected for a year for the same problem, and that protection had only recently expired. Most admins would apply indefinite protection, but in my experience indefinite protections often linger for years longer than necessary so I tend to go for a very long fixed duration, which just means we review the situation every few years. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:06, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

TFA

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thank you for Rochdale Cenotaph, "Yes, another war memorial! This one's in Rochdale, a large town in the north west of England that most non-Brits have probably never heard of, but it has an impressive war memorial." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Rochdale Cenotaph photos

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I was looking through the Rochdale Cenotaph article (TFA today) and was wondering whether some of these memorial articles should have galleries. If I had the time to work on these articles, I would include close-ups of the architectural features (which you have here, on Commons, from Thryduulf) and arrange them in a gallery. I did something along those lines at La Ferté-sous-Jouarre memorial and Dunkirk Memorial and Villers–Bretonneux Australian National Memorial and Memorial Gates, London. (Am also making a note that there are enough photos to do galleries for Arras Memorial and Delville Wood South African National Memorial as well.) What do you think?

I was going to suggest doing something for Rochdale Cenotaph, but I'll hold off as I know people can have differing views on galleries and also the images wouldn't have been reviewed at FAC (not that I'd foresee any problems with them unless the sculptor has different dates to the architect - which can be a problem sometimes). The other thing I noticed, poking around various images for Rochdale Cenotaph, is that there are a couple of historic images (1, 2, 3). Not very good, not from right back when it was erected, but might be worth considering including somehow.

Longer-term, if you have a London memorial coming up for TFA, let me know as I can get to most places in London fairly easily to take photos and close-ups. And I can probably time my visits to avoid the sort of weather you and Thryduulf have run into a few times. Carcharoth (talk) 13:25, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@Carcharoth: Thanks. I was considering a gallery for Rochdale (Thryduulf and I travelled there together, but I din't upload my photos as they were mostly disappointing; I'll have to try and get up that way again in the summer). I haven't had a lot of time on my hands since the new year and the TFA sort of crept up on me. If you want to add a gallery, please do. I quite like galleries where they're useful (cf. Manchester Cenotaph) but I haven't had time this morning and now it's bedtime for me (I work nights, so I won't be at my laptop again until tomorrow morning). I'll certainly let you know if I need photos of anything in London, although central London memorials tend to be better covered than most. You've already seen the Civil Service Rifles and Royal Naval Division memorials; the only others in London that I have firm plans to work on in the near future are Tower Hill and the Cenotaph, though there are several others I'd like to get to once I'm done with Lutyens. Why is it that I only seem to find inspiration for projects while neck-deep in another project! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Grammar changes

Latest comment: 6 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion

I see that you reverted some edits I did on the Rochdale Cenotaph page. Because I was in a hurry, I did multiple edits all at the same time, so in reverting the one that you feel is wrong, all got undone. I've redone just the first one and the last one so far, leaving the middle one up for discussion.

The original sentence is: "The memorial was unveiled in 1922 and consists of a 10-metre (33 ft) pylon, topped by an effigy of a recumbent soldier, and Lutyens' characteristic Stone of Remembrance."

The part I have a problem with is the last phrase "Lutyens' characteristic Stone of Remembrance". (As it has no verb, it isn't a clause, subordinate or otherwise.) Looking at the picture, I can see that only the recumbent soldier is at the top, so removing the comma before the last phrase makes it look as if the Stone is at the top as well. That's why I switched the Stone to earlier in the sentence, finishing up with "topped by an effigy...". Although as you point out, now the "topped" phrase does seem to refer to the Stone instead of the entire Cenotaph.

Can you help me figure out a better way to describe the memorial so that we get the height, the effigy, AND the important stone without confusion??

Thanks much

WesT (talk) 23:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Tim riley - call for Mr Riley! How about removing the first comma? It would then read, "The memorial was unveiled in 1922 and consists of a 10-metre (33 ft) pylon topped by an effigy of a recumbent soldier, and Lutyens' characteristic Stone of Remembrance." But I'm way out of my depth, hence the call for someone else who knows what they're talking about. Great to see it on the front page! KJP1 (talk) 23:29, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
That was the problem that first caught my eye. That last phrase shouldn't have a comma with the conjunction, but any which way I rearrange it, it still has a problem. Thanks for trying to help! WesT (talk) 00:16, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
When describing the layout of memorials, there is probably a certain convention and style that it helps to apply. When you've seen enough of them, you begin to realise how varied it can be. (Though this will apply to all architecture articles.) One of the things I noticed here is how close the Stone is to the Cenotaph (which as the article points out is not technically a cenotaph, but let's call it that). It may be best to separate the description into three parts: the cenotaph, the stone, and the lamp posts. The Historic England listing mentions the lamp posts, which I have been trying to find in the pictures, and I see they are effectively part of the memorial design (am trying to find out why they are listed separately - were they retained from the building that was demolished on the site where the memorial was erected?): see the description here. They are at the four corners of the memorial. The lamp posts should really get more of a mention in the article. One of them is visible here. Another is visible here. Two of them are visible here. Carcharoth (talk) 02:20, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
And here is a news article on the lamp posts: refurbishment in September 2017. I'll leave others to put that in the article, as I should really be doing other things... (One final point: the refurbishment news article mentions that "It is thought that the lamp heads were removed at some point during the 1980s" - if you look at the historical images on the article talk page, you can clearly see that the lamp posts had heads in the earlier pictures, missing by the time of the 1996 photo.) Carcharoth (talk) 02:23, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Thanks very much for digging those up! I was going to stick them on the talk page until I had a chance to do something with them but I see you've already put them there. When I've addressed your comments on the two articles I've currently got up for review, I'll come back to Rochdale. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Ah! I like your idea of splitting up the description. I had a similar thought much later but was uncertain if that would be a feasible solution. If we talk about the cenotaph height and soldier on top in one sentence, then mention the Stone in a separate sentence, it would certainly clarify the situation. I'm not certain about the lamp posts, so I'll leave that part up to editors with more knowledge of the details. Thanks! WesT (talk) 20:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for the belated response. It seems we've resolved the grammar issue. My issue was that your change made it sound like the effigy was on top of the Stone of Remembrance rather than the pylon, which is very obviously incorrect. Your issue was apparently the placement of a comma, but you weren't able to re-write the sentence in a way that made sense without it, which suggests to me that the comma was doing its job. Regardless, it's split now and with Carcharoth's edits we've got more details across two sentences. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Eric Harrison (British Army officer)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, I received your comment and honestly don't understand how any of this, responding to comments and uploading images and so on, works so I'm probably commenting in the wrong place, but to answer your original question I got it from the National Portrait Gallery, and don't wish for it to be deleted but as I've said I don't really get how this all works

@Berserker276: Thanks for getting back to me. I've had a look and it can't stay on Commons and I don't think we can claim it's public domain (it was taken by Walter Stoneman, who died in 1958 and it was published after 1923, so it won't be free of copyright until 2029) but we might be able to keep it under a claim of fair use. Leave it with me. And thanks again for finding the photo! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
@HJ Mitchell: Sorry for the long response, do you think you could keep the picture, under a claim of fair use, as you said? Because, honestly, the article needs some picture or something to look at I think, otherwise it appears dull

FAC

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, would you be interested in reviewing my FAC Margaret (singer).Regards. ArturSik (talk) 18:04, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

A favor

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

Could you please block my account for two months? I do need a wikibreak. I would prefer you rather than someone else do it. Thank you! My very best wishes (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

I placed a "long wikibreak" template on my talk page and really should not be back during this time. Happy editing! My very best wishes (talk) 19:40, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
But after thinking a little, I would like to withdraw this request. Last/first time when I did it, there were certain downsides. Maybe I still will be able to fix a couple of things here and there. My very best wishes (talk) 04:54, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

RIBA Archives

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I had forgotten about this archive. Do you think external links to Lutyens designs would be useful additions? CSR, Rochdale (not used), and this is what the Mells Horner tablet may look like. I also managed to track down a photo of the tablet memorial here (that is from Pinterest, might need to be logged in). Carcharoth (talk) 04:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks Harry for getting some graphics back that had been mistakenly removed from a page I created and, since it was about an artist, really spoilt the value of the page. You are a saint. YellowFratello (talk) 19:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Examples of memorial statues

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Now that I am looking for them, they are popping up everywhere (memorial statues, I mean). A couple of examples from Canada that might interest you (I noticed the edit where you said you were busy, so this is just a note for future reference): George Harold Baker (which I found some nice pictures for and tidied up) and Guy Drummond, both of whom had statues done by R. Tait McKenzie. The latter statue was only half-size and may have ended up in a dusty archive somewhere, rather than on public display. For an amazing piece of synchronicity, see the inscription that was put on Baker's gravestone in Belgium and where the quote came from! (It was probably a very popular work for that sort of thing.) Carcharoth (talk) 01:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

More on Horner statue and memorials

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

This link is to an archived copy of the first part of an essay from 2000 by someone I knew back then, whose website appears to have gone down (I should try and make contact again, and try and get a copy of the full essay). This makes it hard to work out what sources are being used. It may be possible from the surnames to track them down. Hynes is Samuel Hynes (who published A War Imagined: The First World War and English Culture a few years ago that uses the same wording) but I suspect the reference is to an old paper of his that isn't easily findable now. Bruce is Alex Bruce, and the reference will be from 'Monuments, memorials and the local historian' (1997). You are right, it seems that nearly everyone writes something about this memorial! :-) (not that surprising as it is nearly unique.)

Also, FWIW, the wooden board memorial is clearly seen under the window here (but the writing looks to have faded). If you scroll down here, you can see the wooden board in the middle of what I presume is restoration, leading to the (presumably) restored appearance here (as I linked above). Might be worth seeing if there are sources available that talk about any restorations. I suspect that the names of Edward and his brother Mark were originally highlighted in red (see the essay from 2000 that I linked).

Moved this paragraph to the article talk page 00:57, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Hope that is not all too daunting. Quite a lot to work through! Carcharoth (talk) 07:53, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Briefly (following up your note on my talk page, though I left a different note there as well), I came across the following book while looking some more into the Munnings-Lutyens connection. There is something on the Horner memorial in The Englishman: A Biography of Sir Alfred Munnings (1962) by Reginald Pound. Page 77, and only a page, so not a lot, but looks to be a slightly different take on it. FWIW, an early meeting between them is described on page 71: "Not long after he had left the Chelsea Arts Club, he was invited by Sir Edwin Lutyens R.A. to dine with him" - so I think the initial contact was through the Royal Academy (they were both President of the Royal Academy of Arts). A nice Munnings anecdote here. BTW, I wouldn't shell out for this book just for the Horner memorial article. I am pondering an article on Reginald Pound, though - we don't have enough articles on biographers! Carcharoth (talk) 22:41, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Aces in both World Wars

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, In accordance with your message at MilHist discussions, I have listed some of the American two war aces for your consideration.Georgejdorner (talk) 16:38, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

 

  Administrator changes

  None
  Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

  Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
  • Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

  Technical news

  • A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

  Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 5 February 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Memorial photos in newspapers from 1920s and 1930s

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Harry. A brief note to let you know that I am still pondering what can be done with the ILN images I found of the unveiling of those memorials (the CSR and RND ones). Some of these pictures (and others that can be found in newspaper reports from the 1920s and 1930s) are excellent, and even if they can't be used I would like to record the details in some way, both for readers wanting to read/see more, those researching the topic, and for other editors to be aware of. I am wondering where the best place is to record such details, as I'd like in theory to do this for really large numbers of memorials (I have come across many such images).

There are lots of such images in the ILN and The Times and other newspapers of the period. It is difficult to ascertain the current copyright status, but before tackling that I want to get the details recorded somewhere. The articles themselves are the best places, but failing that, talk pages, or a userspace page I may start might be an idea. Or Wikidata (I mentioned this here). Or as references/columns in lists of memorials. What do you think? Carcharoth (talk) 13:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: January 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 


Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

The Bugle: Issue CXLII, February 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

 

  Administrator changes

  Lourdes†
  AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V
† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

  Guideline and policy news

  • The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
  • Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
  • A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
  • A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

  Technical news

  • CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
  • The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

  Miscellaneous

  Obituaries

  • Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: February 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 


Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

The Bugle: Issue CXLIII, March 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 10:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Lancashire Fusiliers War Memorial scheduled for TFA

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This is to let you know that the Lancashire Fusiliers War Memorial article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 25, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 25, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

  • tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
  • adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
  • updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
  • creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Happy first edit day!

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
  Happy First Edit Day, HJ Mitchell, I was doin' something else and happened to notice that today was your first edit day. Thanks for staying on board the Goodship Wikipedia. Have a great day! ―Buster7 ☎ 20:25, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
@Buster7: Thank you very much! A nice thing to come back to after a somewhat unplanned wikibreak! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:31, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HJ_Mitchell/Archive_115&oldid=1145675291"